Two former Christie advisers argued Friday in court papers that the legislative panel investigating the George Washington Bridge lane closures has the power to give them immunity from criminal prosecution in exchange for their cooperation.

Christie’s former campaign manager Bill Stepien, left, and his former deputy chief of staff Bridget Kelly.

A committee of lawmakers with subpoena power has asked a judge to force former campaign manager Bill Stepien and ex-deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly to turn over any documents they have that are related to the lane closures. But both Stepien and Kelly have fought the subpoenas on multiple fronts, most notably because they say providing records would violate their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. They have also suggested that the committee grant them immunity in exchange for their cooperation, but lawyers for the committee of state lawmakers have said it's not clear that they have that power under state law.

The U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey is investigating the lane closures.

Both sides are also clashing over whether the committee has enough specific information implicating Stepien and Kelly to override their Fifth Amendment objections.Stepien's attorney, Kevin Marino, called the 12 e-mail and text messages the committee has produced linking him to the closures and the aftermath "unremarkable." Most of messages made public show that Stepien was kept informed of press coverage after the lanes were re-opened, Marino wrote. And he dismissed the single e-mail sent to Stepien by Port Authority executives while the lanes were still closed. Two Christie allies at the Port Authority forwarded Stepien an e-mail they received from Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich minutes after they received it on the fourth day of the closures. In the letter, Sokolich pleaded for the lanes to be re-opened and speculated that the closures were "punitive." Marino said sending the e-mail to Stepien was understandable given the "public-relations ramifications for the campaign," only months before the governor's re-election.

Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni wrote "following up" in the e-mail to Stepien containing the mayor's letter. At the time, Port Authority executives appeared to be ignoring the mayor's calls and inquiries about why the lanes were closed. In a later e-mail, Stepien referred to Sokolich as "an idiot" in response to a media report that questioned whether the closures were politically-motivated.

Kelly's attorney, Michael Critchley, wrote in a separate brief filed Friday that the committee is arguing it has no clear immunity power because federal prosecutors would potentially intervene and ask for an end to the legislative inquiry. Several of the e-mails already made public illustrate the main constitutional objection to responding to the subpoenas, Critchley wrote. He referenced one apparently written by Kelly to Port Authority Executive David Wildstein that stated, "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

The e-mail makes no explicit mention of lane closures or the George Washington Bridge, he wrote. In order for Kelly to search through similarly imprecise records and determine which related to the lane closures would essentially require her to testify against herself, Critchley wrote. That's important to the legal argument because the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination is most commonly applied to testimony, and in this case, Kelly and Stepien are arguing that responding to the subpoenas for documents would be a "testimonial" act.

The committee maintains that any documents related to the closures are public records. It also submitted to the judge earlier this week dozens of messages that it argues show Stepien and Kelly were "central" to the lane closure scheme. The committee is trying to establish that it's a "foregone conclusion" that Stepien and Kelly have relevant documents based on the information collected so far.

Christie fired Kelly and cut ties with Stepien in January, when a first round of e-mails were made public.

"Although the Governor summarily banished Mr. Stepien immediately following the release of a handful of emails now revealed to be entirely innocuous, the evidence that has since emerged confirms that he was not involved in the Lane Closures or any attempt to conceal them," Marino wrote.

Christie’s former campaign manager Bill Stepien, left, and his former deputy chief of staff Bridget Kelly.

By Shawn Boburg

Staff writer |

The Record

Two former Christie advisers argued Friday in court papers that the legislative panel investigating the George Washington Bridge lane closures has the power to give them immunity from criminal prosecution in exchange for their cooperation.

A committee of lawmakers with subpoena power has asked a judge to force former campaign manager Bill Stepien and ex-deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly to turn over any documents they have that are related to the lane closures. But both Stepien and Kelly have fought the subpoenas on multiple fronts, most notably because they say providing records would violate their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. They have also suggested that the committee grant them immunity in exchange for their cooperation, but lawyers for the committee of state lawmakers have said it's not clear that they have that power under state law.

The U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey is investigating the lane closures.

Both sides are also clashing over whether the committee has enough specific information implicating Stepien and Kelly to override their Fifth Amendment objections.Stepien's attorney, Kevin Marino, called the 12 e-mail and text messages the committee has produced linking him to the closures and the aftermath "unremarkable." Most of messages made public show that Stepien was kept informed of press coverage after the lanes were re-opened, Marino wrote. And he dismissed the single e-mail sent to Stepien by Port Authority executives while the lanes were still closed. Two Christie allies at the Port Authority forwarded Stepien an e-mail they received from Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich minutes after they received it on the fourth day of the closures. In the letter, Sokolich pleaded for the lanes to be re-opened and speculated that the closures were "punitive." Marino said sending the e-mail to Stepien was understandable given the "public-relations ramifications for the campaign," only months before the governor's re-election.

Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni wrote "following up" in the e-mail to Stepien containing the mayor's letter. At the time, Port Authority executives appeared to be ignoring the mayor's calls and inquiries about why the lanes were closed. In a later e-mail, Stepien referred to Sokolich as "an idiot" in response to a media report that questioned whether the closures were politically-motivated.

Kelly's attorney, Michael Critchley, wrote in a separate brief filed Friday that the committee is arguing it has no clear immunity power because federal prosecutors would potentially intervene and ask for an end to the legislative inquiry. Several of the e-mails already made public illustrate the main constitutional objection to responding to the subpoenas, Critchley wrote. He referenced one apparently written by Kelly to Port Authority Executive David Wildstein that stated, "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

The e-mail makes no explicit mention of lane closures or the George Washington Bridge, he wrote. In order for Kelly to search through similarly imprecise records and determine which related to the lane closures would essentially require her to testify against herself, Critchley wrote. That's important to the legal argument because the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination is most commonly applied to testimony, and in this case, Kelly and Stepien are arguing that responding to the subpoenas for documents would be a "testimonial" act.

The committee maintains that any documents related to the closures are public records. It also submitted to the judge earlier this week dozens of messages that it argues show Stepien and Kelly were "central" to the lane closure scheme. The committee is trying to establish that it's a "foregone conclusion" that Stepien and Kelly have relevant documents based on the information collected so far.

Christie fired Kelly and cut ties with Stepien in January, when a first round of e-mails were made public.

"Although the Governor summarily banished Mr. Stepien immediately following the release of a handful of emails now revealed to be entirely innocuous, the evidence that has since emerged confirms that he was not involved in the Lane Closures or any attempt to conceal them," Marino wrote.